/r/Games is for informative and interesting gaming content and discussions. Please look over our rules and FAQ before posting. If you're looking for "lighter" gaming-related entertainment, try /r/gaming!

The goal of /r/Games is to provide a place for informative and interesting gaming content and discussions. Submissions should be for the purpose of informing or initiating a discussion, not just with the goal of entertaining viewers.

You can't have an AAA without mandatory, hamfisted violence/sex scenes, right?. It has to be a "mature" story, right?

I think a lot of comments are missing the point about why this sort of thing happens.

The problem with lots of media, it's not just video games, is that it assumes the only way something can be compelling and "for adults" is if its something a society would call "for adults only" in the sense that children should probably not be seeing it.

But this misses the mark tremendously.

Complicating the issue is how blase we are with the ratings systems for videogames in the U.S., in part, because developers really, really don't want to have it be true that 10-17 year olds could somehow not being playing CoD games; they're the demographic most attracted to "cool" violent things and they're the demographic which has parents with money who will buy them stuff they ask for.

A little silly however is the insistence of redditors that the sex portrayed in videogames should somehow just be fine and American censors/big box retailers choosy about what gets sold in their stores need to get over "natural" stuff like sex if they're willing to tolerate lots of gory violence.

This is also kind of 'missing the mark' - though not as badly as content creators assuming 'people killing' and 'people fucking' need to be featured in something for it to be "for adults"

Sex isn't a hugely public thing; most people don't have sex after a few lines of shitty, shitty dialogue spoken between characters thrust into desperate/epic circumstances viewed from a third person camera.

In fact, sex is generally an intensely private, emotionally complicated thing, and it usually isn't dangling there as a "reward" for having "completed objectives" as a cutscene to be unlocked in the narrative of someone's life.

It's totally reasonable for parents, communities, etc. to want to have some say in how both violence and sex are depicted to their youth.

It's not reasonable that there should be such disparity in ratings systems and such mindless lack of adherence to those self regulations like ESRB.

Resolving this is going to demand stuff from content creators and the people who consume games themselves - - - but I think redditors are mostly interested in whining and loling about "puritan America"

Sex isn't a hugely public thing; most people don't have sex after a few lines of shitty, shitty dialogue spoken between characters thrust into desperate/epic circumstances viewed from a third person camera.

Depends what type of game you are playing in what age. Anything modern, sure. But as you go farther back in time you will find sex isn't something simply done between a man and wife in the comforts of their bedroom. Even today, if you legalized slavery, made slaves property with no rights, and took away women's "equalness" to men in the eyes of the law, you'd be surprised how many "moral" people would it ok to rape or have open sex with their slaves.

I am going to be 100% honest here. The whole idea that only 18+ folks should exposed to sexual content at all is hugely hypocritical of society. It fails to acknowledge the very nature of the changes the youth goes through. It's extremely common and just natural that they will seek sexual content as the youth goes through puberty.

I can agree that not all kinds of content are for everyone, and some maturity is needed for more extreme content, and it is a generally good thing that there is some regulation to serve as reference. I can also agree that an 10 year old shouldn't be playing GTAV or watching porn videos.

But this idea that teenagers shouldn't be exposed to any sexual content is just denial. The puritan ideals more often lead to repressed people who hide when they act on their urges anyway, than a responsible society in which the youth knows what they are getting to instead of being scolded for the mistakes they make when it is too late.

And it's more about medical information. It's about knowing how to deal with relationships, pressures and ultimately their own needs. And personally I don't know a single person who really had this kind of support, including myself.

But I also know it's a very delicate situation for parents to deal with. To the point that many don't, and I can somewhat understand the view behind it, but maybe there should be some encouragement for something different to be tried, instead of just supporting the view that the youth shouldn't be exposed at all to any sexual material, which they will most likely seek and find anyway. Parents should be allowed to parent however they want (within legality), but not all things work equally.

Now, I agree that the vast majority of games that include sexual content do it in a puerile way just for titillation. But I don't think the problem is being "reward-based". The world itself is considerably reward based. It isn't as simple as gift = sex, but relationships themselves are something that require effort and can be rewarding, even regardless of sex. And so are jobs, friendships, art and pretty much every endeavor one can think of.

The real problem is the lack of nuance. That games make it look like gift = sex. As most common sources of sexual content are very shallow, bringing a warped view of it. So... for the most part neither sides approach it adequately. A change would be welcome, but a middle ground can't be found if the status quo becomes that everything is blocked, tamed and culled.

Well, I should tell where I'm coming from with this. I've been raised by a traditional family under more puritan values, and though I wasn't entirely left in ignorance (I was given a medical book), growing up it was heavily impressed in me (not only by my parents) a dry and negative idea of sex: it can get you sick, it can cause unwanted children (and your parents won't like you anymore), it's immoral, God doesn't like it, it's only for married adults and you are too young to think about it.

That really didn't stop me from thinking about it. It did make me feel extremely self-conscious and disgusted at myself. Since porn and masturbation was so wrong, I knew I would go to hell, girls would think I was disgusting and evil, and I would be forever alone. Those ideas were damaging to me. It took me a long while until I could accept my sexuality (even more than I imagined).

Now, different people may have different experiences. Some may disregard that mentality and turn out fine, or get an STD or an unwanted child by being careless, others may accept it and still feel fine about themselves. But I wish younger me could have had help to understand and accept those feelings, rather than struggling and repressing it.

God of War is not an insidious parasite that takes over anyone's mind. It's a voluntarily bought product that comes with a warning about the contents. If parents are so worried about it, it's their responsibility to handle it or just not give it to their children.

My point, though, is that if it's so inevitable and worrisome that children will be exposed to certain contents, pretending they don't exist is a terrible approach. Trying to child-proof the whole culture is even worse for depriving other mature people from it. What should be done is teaching them how to handle that content, how it reflects real life, what is the correct approach, because that is the only way you can actually be sure that it won't "subvert" the child. Ignorance if anything makes subversion even more likely.

You can't have an AAA without mandatory, hamfisted violence/sex scenes, right?. It has to be a "mature" story, right?

I imagine they are drawing inspiration from the TV series Spartacus which had a fair amount of nudity and sex. I don't see why it needs to be in a game - plenty of other interesting things going on without it.

While I agree, I still think removing something like this so they don't upset the sensibilities of some ignorant moral entrepreneurs is still a bullshit move, and its clearly what's happening and not an artistic decision given that its releasing uncensored elsewhere

I'm guessing you haven't watched Spartacus? FYI its on Starz not HBO. Just as much male nudity as female nudity. Also two of the male main characters were homosexual and had numerous sex scenes on the show. I am sure the amount of nudity and sex was played up, but don't forget this is ancient roman times. A time where having people fight to the death is entertainment. Where these amazing fighters are slaves fighting for their freedom. If anything, some of the gore on the show seemed more dramtically used than the nudity and sex.

Not Spartacus, it's true. Game of Thrones however has been decidedly forward with sexualized females alone, in contrast to the book (which is itself filled with totally unecessary sex and occasionally plot irrelevant violence)

GoT had to age the women in order to have it air on television, as the forced wedding and rape that Daenarys (sp?) goes through wouldn't have worked with her still 12 (no way that gets aired in the U.S.) So while khaleesi herself has alot of nudity, more than mentioned in the book, they did cut down the sexuality between jon and the red-haired girl (that scene in the third book was SUPER IN DEPTH).